at opposite ends of the uk to diligent represent their community and constituency. they will be sadly missed by all of us, particularly in the labour party who they serve so well for their entire lives. mr. speaker, in 2010 the labour government intervened through hmrc to shut down isle of man scheme used to import yachts into the european union, and thus avoid tax. a similar sch the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. pursuant to house resolution 595 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2017] >> more house of commons at cspan.org as the u.s. house of representatives gavels back in. will the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. rothfus, kindly resume the chair. house is in the

committee of the whole house on the state of the union for further consideration of h.r. 2936 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill to expedite under the national environmental policy act of 1969 improve forest management activity on national forest system lands, on public lands under jurisdiction of the bureau of land management and on tribal lands to return resilience to overgrown, fire-prone forested lands and for other purposes. the chair: when the committee of the whole rose earlier today, a request for a recorded vote on amendment number 7 rinted in house report 115-378 offered by the gentleman from new mexico, mr. pearce, had een postponed. pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, proceedings will now resume on those amendments printed in house report 115-378 on which further proceedings were postponed in the following order. amendment number 2, mr. khanna

of california. amendment number 3, mr. o'halleran of arizona. amendment number 7 by mr. pearce of new mexico. the chair will reduce to two minutes after the first vote in the series. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 2 printed in house report 115-378 by the gentleman from california, mr. khanna, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 2 printed in house report 115-378 offered by mr. khanna of california. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise nd be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes y electronic device.

this will be a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 19 and the nays are 232. he amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 3 printed in house report 115-378 by the gentleman from arizona, mr. o'halleran, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the nays prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 3 house report 115-378

by mr. ole haleran of arizona. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 194 and the nays are 226. he amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 7 printed in house report 115-378 by the gentleman from new mexico, mr. pearce, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 7 printed in house report 115-378 offered by mr. pearce of new mexico. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested.

those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise nd be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 236. the nays are 186. he amendment is adopted. the question is on the amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the amendment is adopted. accordingly under the rule the ommittee arises. the speaker pro tempore: mr. chairman. the chair: the committee of the whole house on the state of the union has had under consideration h.r. 2936 and

pursuant to house resolution 595 i report the bill back to the house with an amendment adopted in the committee of the whole. the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration house resolution 2936 and pursuant to house resolution 595 reports the bill back to the house with be a aamendment adopted in the committee of the whole. is there a separate vote demanded to any amendment. if not the question is on adoption of the amendment in the nature of a substitute. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. third reading. the clerk: a bill to expedite under the national environmental policy act of 1959 and improve forest management activities on lands, on public lands under the jurisdiction under bureau of land management and on tribal land to return resilience to

fire-prone forest lands and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the house will be in order. members, please take your seats. the house will be in order. he house will be in order. members will please take their seats. please remove your conversation from the house floor. he house will be in order. he house will be in order. for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? >> i have a motion to recommit at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: is the gentleman opposed to the bill? >> i am opposed in its current

form. the speaker pro tempore: the bill. ill report the the speaker pro tempore: mr. o'halleran reports -- the clerk: mr. o'halleran reports the following amendment, page 41 of the rules committee print 115-36 after line 21 insert the following new section -- section 40 -- mr. o'halleran: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will suspend. mr. bishop: i ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of the amendment. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection? without objection, the reading is suspended. he house will be in order. the house will be in order. he house will be in order. the gentleman from arizona is recognized for five minutes.

>> this is the final amendment to the bill which will not kill it or send it back to committee. if adopted, the bill will proceed to final passage as amended. mr. speaker, schools and counties across rural america are facing a funding and economic crisis. mr. o'halloran: it has now been over two years since congress has failed to re-authorize the secure rules school -- secure rural schools program. this is beyond unacceptable. schools and counties across rural america are facing a funding and economic crisis and the re-authorization of the secure rural schools and community self-determination act will go a long way to ensuring children get the education they need to achieve success in today's economy. the speaker pro tempore: the house if in -- the house is not in order. the house will be in order. members, please remove conversations from the house floor. he house will be in order.

the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. o'halleran: i have heard families, teachers and school administrators tell me about the dire straits schools will be in if s.r.s. is not re-authorized. n greenlee county in eastern arizona, the school superintendent shared with me, if the county does see s.r.s. dollars they'll have to close the school that provides special education service. this is after the school has gone through major changes to save money. across rural arizona, schools face issues with access to technology and education opportunities. that came from them. re-authorizing secure rural schools will allow more schools to develop innovative educational opportunities. yet in one county where they are

using distance learn, schools can share teachers, making sure students don't miss opportunities because they live in rural america is the right thing to do and re-authorizing s.r.s. will better enable coordination and support for students. mr. speaker, the people of rural arizona and america are tough and innovative but the simple fact is that they need resources to keep schools open and educate children. it is pastime that we re-authorize s.r.s. and i call on my colleagues to do so today. across rural america and rural arizona the need for infrastructure is only growing. in hila county, a bridge is needed to make it safer for people to cross a creek. s.r.s. funding would make it possible for the county to make a greater contribution to get that completed. if we are serious about passing a bipartisan infrastructure plan

it's critical we make sure local communities can begin planning. re-authorizatn of s.r.s. would allow that to happen. nationally, there are 720 counties and 4 -- and 4,400 school districts that that depend on secure rural schools for education as well as other critical services and programs like law enforcement and infrastructure. rural america is ready for a renaissance. but for it to happen, we need to make sure that folks have equal access to opportunities in school and in the work force. that means we need to guarantee that schools have the resources they need to educate our children and achieve their potential. that means we need to make sure that communities have infrastructure that supports local economies and keeps people safe. that means we need to make sure that rural americans have a fair shot.

i call on my colleagues to support my commonsense amendment on behalf of kids across rural america and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from utah seek recognition? mr. bishop: i claim time in opposition. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. bishop: -- the speaker pro tempore: think gentleman will suspend for a moment. the house will be in order. he house will be in order. the gentleman from utah is recognized. mr. bishop: mr. speaker, i appreciate the gentleman from arizona in presenting this issue about secure rural schools. i'm an old schoolteacher, i understand how significant and important it is. the issue for secure rural schools is not the re-authorization, it's finding a funding scream to keep it going. unfortunately, this amendment opportunity solve the problem. it's not re-authorization it's the funding and this provides no funding what is over. it doesn't do what we need to do. it simply -- it's simply another

delay tactic. let's face it, we are dealing with more significant issues in this nation like who is going to win game seven tonight. that's important stuff. that's what we should be talking about. and if you don't pass this forest resiliency act today there won't be enough trees to make bats for next year's season. please vote no on this amendment, vote yes on the underlying bill, let's go home. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. without objection, the previous question is ordered. the question is on the notion recommit. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the noes have it. the motion is not agreed to. the gentleman from arizona. mr. o'halleran: i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested, those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having risen, a recorded vote is order. this five-minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by five minutes vote on

the rule if ordered, will be a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 189, the nays are 230. the motion is not adopt the question is on pass ooge of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the bill is passed. for what purpose does the gentleman from utah seek recognition? or the gentleman from arizona?

>> i'd like a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having risen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: the yeas are 232 and the nays are 188. the bill is passed. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. unfinished business is on the vote of the the gentleman from michigan to pass h.r. 3399. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 274, a bill to amend the securities act of 1933 to expand the abilities to use testing the waters submissions and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute,

inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: the yeas are 419 and the nays are zero. and the bill is passed and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i send to the desk two privileged reports from the committee on rules for filing under the rule. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the titles. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 600, resolution to repeal the provisions of the patient and affordable care act providing for the independent advisory board. report to accompany house resolution 601, resolution for consideration of the bill h.r. 3 22 to extend funding for certain

public health programs and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from seek recognition? >> the engrossment of h.r. 390 , the clerk be authorized to make changes as may be necessary to reflect the actions of the house in amending the bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania. >> i ask unanimous consent that i may be considered as the primary sponsor of h.res. 428, a resolution introduced by mr. and requesting reprintings under clause 7 of rule 12. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. thompson: i ask that the clerk make technical corrections to include corrections in

spelling, he section numbing and cross referencing in the insertion of appropriate headings. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> i ask key that the armed services be discharged on h.r. 4 and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report. the clerk: house concurrent 11 ution 4 , providing of african-american soldiers of the 1 united states army who had been captured during the battle of the bulge on december 17, 19 4. the speaker pro tempore: is concurrent ion to resolution? without objection. the motion to reconsider is laid n the table.

for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. poe: i move the house suspend the rules. the clerk: h.r. 25 the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend. does the gentleman mean 425? the clerk: h.r. 425, a bill to authorize the denial of passports to individuals affiliated with foreign affiliations. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the

gentleman from texas, mr. poe, and the gentleman from new york. mr. poe: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five days to include extraneous materials on this measure. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. poe: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. poe: the terrorist attack last night in new york city comes as a reminder that the enemies will not cease. eight people were killed in what law enforcement officials are calling new york's deadliest attack since 9/11. he was radicalized domestically by isis highlighting the grave threat. e terrorist last night was a

terrorist from uzbekistan uzbekistan. and there are americans who thies with those who seek to destroy our freedom. as many as 250 american citizens have sought to travel to syria and more than 1,000 and they have received terrorist training. some are under the command and control of terrorist leaders who have instructed them to attack the united states whenever. others are inspired by the ideology of hate the terrorists post on social media sites. many of these are american social media sites. they are a direct threat many of these are direct threats to our homeland. our current safeguards are insufficient to protect us against these. a 22-year-old florida nate i became the first american to rry out a suicide bombing in

syria. he'd battled and been trained by syria's al qaeda affiliate for same time. he was waived through border inspections when traveling home to florida a year earlier. after traveling to florida he then traveled back to syria. when he blew himself up in may of 2014, al qaeda released a video of his last will and testament, quote, you think you are safe where you are in america, you are not safe, end of quote. mr. speaker, today we are at a dangerous crossroads as isis loses more territory in its so-called caliphate and it collapses, the threat to our homeland will really grow. americans who have been fighting with isis will be looking for ways to come home to stage deadly attacks. in recent week a man from alexandria, virginia, was convicted on terrorism charges for joining isis.

he was sentenced to 20 years in the penitentiary. this terrorist individual to our nation became -- named four other westerners who had joined isis and left syria with intentions to do harm in their home countries. law enforcement officials and terrorism experts have been warning of this foreign fighter threat for years. this is a serious threat and we must address it before it becomes worse. having betrayed our nation we must revoke the privileges that come with an american passport. that is why my colleague, mr. bill keating from massachusetts, and i, introduced h.r. 425. the foreign terrorist organization passport revocation act. it authorizes the secretary of state to revoke passports of those who have joined foreign terrorist organizations. and i might add, mr. speaker, this is a legal term. what a foreign terrorist organization is. so it's only those

organizations. these individuals are u.s. citizens but they betrayed our country. they should clearly not be allowed the privilege of international travel with an american passport and they should definitely not be able to come back into the united states when they travel overseas such as in syria. this bipartisan bill will stop benedict arnolds from using their passports to travel to other war zones to attack any of our allies. mr. speaker, there's nothing -- there is absolutely nothing in current regulations specifically to support foreign tryst organizations. the secretary of state does not have the authority to revoke passports on a broad national security basis. it's time our laws change and catch up with the modern world and the new and real threats to our nation. let me be clear, mr. speaker, this bill would not strip

americans of their citizenship. it would deny those americans who have sided with foreign terrorist organizations the privilege of travel internationally. the bill would also not impinge on any americans' due process rights if they want to appeal the designation or the revocation of their passport. anyone whose passport is revoked or denied is eligible for due process hearing within 60 days. the bill would actually increase oversight on this possess by requiring the state department to report directly to congress whenever the secretary moves to revoke or deny an american's passport on these grounds. i want to thank my colleague from massachusetts, mr. keating, for working with me on this bill. we both soint the foreign affairs committee subcommittee on terrorism as the chair and ranking member. we have both been working on this issue of foreign fighter threats for some time. and we believe this is a good

first step to protect our homeland. i also want to thank the chairman royce for his help in getting this important bill in the committee passed and also the ranking member, mr. engel from new york where this unfortunate tragic event occurred last night. mr. speaker, the point is this. the traitors among us who have chosen to make their allegiance to a murderous ideology instead of the country that gave them life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness must face the consequences. if you take up arms with our enemy you deserve to be treated like one. and i'll reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in strong support of this measure. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized.

mr. engel: as a new yorker, my heart aches today. the appalling loss of life on the streets of manhattan yesterday is a reminder that terrorism remains a threat that demands our focus. confronting violent exdreamism requires sound, reasoned policy, policy pross portional to the threat. policies base ont good intelligence, careful analysis and a clear understanding of what we're up against. not policies based on his terical reactions or biases against certain faiths or nationalities. i support this bill because it will ensure that the state department has the tools to prevent american terrorists from traveling abroad or returning to our country. under this legislation, the secretary of state could refuse to issue a passport or revoke a passport to any american who provided assistance to foreign terrorist organizations. importantly, it also affords anyone affected the right to an appeals process, helping to

ensure due process rights. this bill is just common sense. it's also a vital aspect of the fight against terrorism. we don't want known threats crossing our borders or slipping from country to country anywhere in the world. now the bill we're considering today would not have obviously prevented yesterday's attack. but this is important. this is just a piece of a larger strategy. the president yesterday -- excuse me. the president yesterday called on judicial system which would prosecute the perpetrator of yesterday's attack a joke and laughing stock. i beg to disagree. that's our judicial system which successfully prosecuted the shoe bomber richard reed, the world osama nter bosmer, and bin laden's son-in-law in march

of 2014. mr. speaker, the judicial brverage has done quite a good job in prosecuting terrorists. let's show them a little confidence and give credit where credit is due. but friends, this is deadly serious. the man suspected in yesterday's attack was radicalized after he arrived in the united states. we've seen this before. in san bernardino and orlando. isis inspires its adhereins from thousands of miles away. that's a problem. and just as this bill gets at a narrow, specific vulnerability, policies to deal with homegrown extremists and terrorists should take a hard look at causes and take appropriate action to prevent this sort of radicalization on american shores. we won't solve this problem by slamming shut america's front door and clamping down on immigration. in fact, doing so just contributes to the terrorist ideological ammunition and recruitment efforts.

these -- there are proven ways to combat terrorism but demonizing a religion or chipping away at constitutional rights won't work. those approaches play right into the tactics terrorists use to radicalize vulnerable americans making us less safe and less free. so i want to thank representatives poe and keating who leads our subcommittee on the foreign affairs committee, subcommittee on terrorism. this bipartisan bill gets at a real concern in the fight against terrorism. i'm pleased to support it. i reserve the balance of my time. with all due respect to mr. poe, that's just the way it is. mr. poe: we hadn't got therein yet. i continue to reserve. hank you, mr. speaker. mr. engel: it is my pleasure to yield four minutes to the ranking member of the terrorism subcommittee, the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. bill keating.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. keating: i rise in strong support of h.r. 425, the foreign terrorist organization passport revocation act. mr. speaker, i can't speak to the subject of terrorism without condemning the senseless and heinous attack that took place yesterday in new york city. my prayers are with all the individuals and families that were affected. my utmost respect goes to the new york city community that once again stands strong, stands together, unintimidated. mr. speaker, i introduced this important piece of legislation, h.r. 425, together with chairman ted poe of the foreign affairs subcommittee and terrorism nonproliferation and trade. as we've discussed this legislation works to strengthen the tools we have at our disposal for combating terrorism. put simply, the secretary of state can refuse to issue or

revoke the passport to any individual the secretary determines is affiliated with or is aided, assisted, or abetted a designated foreign terrorist organization. the terrorist threats we face today are complex. federal, state, and local agencies are fighting terrorism at a time when isis and other terrorist organizations are able to use new technologies and means of communication to connect with individuals around the globe to fund, to direct, nd inspire acts of terror. modes of international travel are more accessible and affordable than ever. cross border flofse people and goods have increased as we've become more connected in the global world. while these are very positive developments for exchange, competitiveness and quality of life, we also have to be sure we are managing the risks that go along with this increased

connectivity. we have to make it harder for anyone supporting terrorism to benefit from the increased ease of global movement. that's why our legislation is important. we must ensure that the secretary of state has the clear authority to refuse a passport to anyone affiliated with or supporting a designated foreign terrorist organization. is legislation provides that specific statutory authority as well as improved congressional oversight are in place. it's also important that there are safeguards in place in order to -- in order for any law to be successful. that's why i'm pleased that h.r. 425 also includes a right of review for anyone whose passport has been refused or revoked. absolutely possible to fight terrorism while still upholding protections for individuals' rights and the rule of law.

and it's critical that we do both. in fighting to protect our communities and our democracy, we cannot compromise these very things we're fighting to protect. i'd like to thank chairman ted poe for joining me in introducing h r. 425, the foreign terrorist organization passport revocation act, and i'd like to also thank chairman ed royce and ranking member eliot engel for their support for this bill as well. within the foreign affairs committee. i urge in closing that all our colleagues join together in support of this important legislation and with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from texas. the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new york. mr. engel: i ask the gentleman from texas if he has more speakers. mr. poe: there are none except

me. mr. engel: ok then, i'll close. thank you. mr. speaker, let me again thank our chairman, ed royce, of california, as well as representatives poe and keating. s that good bill. it's a commonsense bill. it's a good example of how we need to legislate chen it comes to terrorism. we're acting out of innovation, out of careful analysis, not out of fear. we all feel the sting today of an attack on american soil yesterday. as lawmakers, one of our most important jobs is to help keep americans safe and there's no worse heartbreak than when we see innocent lives lost. so i'm glad we're moving this bipartisan measure today. i'm pleased to support it. i urge all members to do the same. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from texas. r. poe: mr. speaker, i want to emphasize again our prayers for the folks in new york city and for the appreciation of our

first responders who are always there as you personally know, mr. speaker, and new york tranlcy -- tragedy is an example of how they respond and chase and go after terrorists. ather than run from terror. the foreign affairs committee, we work primarily bipartisan, mr. speaker. that shocks a lot of folks here in washington, d.c. and it sure shocks a lot of folks back home. but most of the things that come before the house floor have been bipartisan pieces of legislation. we spend a lot of time on legislation. and almost always comes to the house floor with unanimous votes or mostly unanimous votes on the committee level. and we work very well on these

issues, because these are not partisan issues but american issues we are talking about. mr. speaker, there are about 61 designated foreign terrorist organizations that our state department has said are foreign terrorist organizations. and to prevent individuals in merica who side with these organizations, who support these organizations, who are part of these organizations, from traveling around the world and coming back home based upon their activities. this legislation, mr. keating has introduced, keep them from traveling, because we know who these people are and keep them from coming back to the united states. what would happen if a passport is revoked and some american is

in syria and is radicalized. he tries to get on a plane and he is stopped and turned over to our justice department. there are only a few places under our law where a passport revoked, not paying child support. so we are not talking about a lot of examples but talking about this example. and i'm a former judge and mr. keating is a former prosecutor, due process for americans is always important. and the supreme court has already ruled on whether or not passports can be revoked under certain circumstances and have afffirmed the authority of the state department to revoke passports in specific cases based upon national security

reasons. this bill allows for due process of those people who are allowed -- have their passports revoked. this is a good step in protecting the united states. this is bipartisan legislation. i think it's very important that we take this step. once again, my prayers, our prayers are with those folks in new york. mr. speaker, we are not going to allow terrorists to have their day. we are not going to allow them to have their way. and that's just the way it is. i will yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 425 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3

being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid n the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move the house suspend the rules and pass house resolution 422 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 422, resolution urging adherence to the as prescribed in the joint declaration between the government of the united kingdom on the question of the hong kong. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from florida, mr. yoho and the gentleman from new york, mr. engel, each will control 20

minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. mr. yoho: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this measure. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. yoho: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. yoho: i want to recognize ranking member engel for authorizing this important measure on hong kong, the city known as the pearl of the orient. i commend you for your strong advocating to one country, two-system policy that has allowed hong kong's prosperity for so long. i joined you as an original co-sponsor. during a recent trip, we heard firsthand how measures like this

are helpful on keeping the pressure on beijing. 20 years have now passed since e handover to the people's republic of china. the congress played a vital role bypassing the hong kong policy act of 1992. this act accomplished that the a . would treat hong kong as nonsoffer sovereign entity so long as it remained sufficiently autonomous. hong kong has continued to be a global, economic force in our financial hub. in recent years, it has begun to increase social, economic and political challenges including external pressures. mr. speaker, we awe the umbrellas movement protest in

2014 which were led by youths eeking to liberalize the electoral system in accordance with the declaration. in the years, we have witnessed book sellers kidnapped from hong jailed. se being for many of us here in congress, there is concern about the increased role. therefore, mr. speaker, it is important to reiterate that our special treatment of hong kong awe tondent of it being moist. and we have respect for individual freedoms remain as the life blood of hong kong and its economic prosperity as guaranteed again by china and great britain.

ssage of this resolution demonstrates our support. i urge my colleagues to join me in support of this measure and i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york. mr. engel: i rise in support of this measure and i yield myself such time as i may consume. let me start by thanking our chairman, ed royce for his leadership and working with me to bring this measure forward. i introduced this resolution with representatives are chabot, oho and smith and i listened intently to mr. yoho and also know that we make progress on the foreign affairs committee because, as mr. poe of texas said, we work in a bipartisan

measure and try to agree on the language and try to make sure that the u.s. congress speaks with one voice so our friends and adversaries understand we put partisanship aside and leave it at the water's edge and i think that's important. the kind of people that the foreign affairs committee attracts are the kind that keeps perpetrating this bipartisan spirit, because we have differences in policies for sure. we are all americans and we want to make sure we are safe and america does the right thing and so when we have the incident like we had yesterday with the terrible terrorist attack in manhattan, it makes us pause as a congress and think about what

this all means. people in hong kong were made promises as well. they were made promises years ago that china would be one country including hong kong and hong kong would be an independent system. the chinese officials in the beijing regime has tried to go after student protesting, curbing the rights and values of the people of hong kong. this resolution is very, very important. so i thank again, mr. smith, chairman yoho and representative chabot. i thank their contributions. and jennifer on my staff. it is a great example of bipartisanship and we work together and we produce superior

products the. the united states has shared a unique relationship with hong kong. that relationship has been based on their autonomy. this underscores our national security interests in seeing hong kong remain autonomous at a time when we have seen troubling trends. 20 years ago, china made a commitment that hong kong would enjoy its special status. today china claims that the 1997 joint declaration is a so-called historical document that has again no practical significance. but the u.k. and the united states believe in international law and we are committed to holding china to its word again, i'll quote, one country, two systems of government. this approach was experimented with when they devised it. hong kong was a british colony.

the chinese government said hong kong would have its own executive, judicial rights. and the people would enjoy fundamental rights guaranteed. but beijing is backing away. even declaring the joint declaration a historical document with no relevance today. meddling in hong kong's election led to the umbrellas protests in 2014. hong kong residents critical of the peoples republic of china have disappeared. while the army has grown of the the credibility of hong kong's courts has suffered to send umbrellas student leaders to prison after they served their previous sentences. and journalists face regular harassment. we are worried mr. speaker and

worried about what is going to happen to the people of hong kong and china's posture is going to affect our relationship with hong kong in the future. 20 years after accepting the so-called one country, two systems model. china's objective is making the main ld, one country, one system. this is not what the international community, the united states, great britain or the people of hong kong signed up for. this raises bigger questions. to what degree will the chinese government live up to its international commitments as china continues to expand economically? this measure says enough. and sends a measure to china that we in the united states expect beijing to keep its word. it reiterates our special bond

is based on our shared values and we want to see that relationship endure for years to come. i'm grateful for my colleagues working on this measure with me. i ask support from all members. and i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. yoho: i have no further speakers and reserve the right to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new york. mr. engel: in closing, mr. speaker, let help remind that hong kong is special because of its strong rule of law. that's also the reason why the united states shares such a strong strategic relationship with hong kong. this resolution is a reminder of why our ties of hong kong are so important and call for all parties to respect the commitments that have

underpinned hong kong's autonomy. when china is growing more stronger, the united states cannot be seen as creeding ground. we need to stand up for our friends and values and interests and hold countries to their commitments just as the united states lives up to their own. i ask our members to stand up for this. and i yield back. . . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. yoho: i want to thank the gentleman. i chair the subcommittee on foreign affairs, it's been a bipartisan committee, to see everybody come together to work on these different situations

and different bills and resolutions is so important that we project a unified body and i would think china as they move forward would look hard to honor their commitment that they made because it's not just hong kong they're influencing, it's all the other countries in the world and it'll determine future negotiations on how china, beijing, honors their commitment that they made with hong kong that the other nations will look at. hong kong plays an important role in today's regional and world economy. it opens -- its open market and strong rule of law served as a strong example of how freedom and rules based society can foster a positive environment for its peoples, happiness, and prosperity. the u.s. has benefited greatly from strong economic cultural ties to hong kong and i'd venture to say the world has benefited from that. we want to continue this relationship. but to do so, hong kong must

remain sufficiently autonomous. our president is headed on a phi-country, 12-day tour of the asia area at the end they have week and it'll be his first time visiting china as president. with this resolution, we send a strong message from congress about our support for hong kong's continued prosperity and special that the status. thus we urge faithfulness to the one country, two system policy established by the joint declaration and the basic law with respect to hong kong's autonomy and its enjoyment of the legislative, executive and judicial powers. hong kong's independent judiciary must be sacrosanct. i'd like to thank ranking member engel again and original co-sponsors, mr. smith, mr. chabot, mr. sherman and mr. connolly. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back.

the question is, will the house agree to house resolution 422 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the resolution is agreed to, and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. without objection, the title amended. the chair will now entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? the gentleman is recognized.

>> mr. speaker, it's with great sadness i rise tonight to honor the passing of stanley coolidge his is fiance -- and fiancee roseann hannah. mr. lamalfa: they were trapped in their california home as it was destroyed by wildfire. what began with the faint smell of fire became a tragedy as the rea around their home. their house was engulfed by flames before they could escape. he was a retired attorney, born in san francisco, lived his last 50 years in the mountains of lombings ma rica, california. they were very valued members of their communities. our thoughts and prayers are withhe coolidge and hannah families as we ask the lord's

blessings for comfort and healing in this very tragic, very, very sad time. as well as the families of all whwere lost as a result of the fire the west. stan and roseanne, you'll be missed. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from ohio seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentleman is -- the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. kaptur: let me say to my brother steve in ohio, i'm so proud of you, your coage, your goodness, and your honor. mr. speaker, meanwhile, president trump andhe republicans are doing everything to railroad tax breaks through this congress to the top 1% with no open hearings work deals being cut in the speaker's office, so i say whoa. it's worth taking a step back to talk about what a good tax plan contains. a good tax plan puts money back in the pockets of middle class

working families. and sml business owners. a good tax plan spurs job creation right here in the u.s.a. yet everything we've seen and ard from the republicans does exactlyhe opposite. the goal should be to create more stability in our economy. not raise the deficit. and we've got to stop businesses from shping jobs overseas. as companies hold their money offshore. theyhould bring it back home. ta reform shouldn't be negotiated in secret. why should lobbyists know more about the bill than members of congress? a tax bill shouldn't explode our deficit or threan your 41 k plan or hurt medicare -- your 401k plan or hurt medicare or medicaid. it's time for republicans to do their jobs, put forward a budget-balancing tax plan that helps american families, not justillionaires and multimillionaires and bring the plan forward in sunlight, not backroom dealing. mr. speaker, i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? the gentleman is recognized. mr. poe:: mr. speaker, sergeo jose martinez was trolling a parking garage in sanctuary city portland, oregon, armed with a knife he set his sights on his prey a defenseless 65-year-old woman and attacked her. but the woman fought back and pressed the panic button on her car. martinez, the coward, fled the scene but was caught. martinez, after serving several stints in the u.s. penitentiary, has been deported over 20 times. but the criminal does his time, gets deported and just comes back into the united states. our border protectors do the best they can but they are out manned, out gunned and out financed by the drug cartels, criminal gangs and outlaws

trying to enter the united states. the mortgage security act for america authorizes a border wall both physical and virtual, puts more boots on the ground, more boats in the water and gives more equipment to law enforcement. we must keep criminals like martinez out of the united states. and that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman rom new york seek recognition? the gentleman is recognized. >> mr. speaker, i rise to mourn those lost and injured in last year's -- in yesterday's terror attack in new york city. the new york city police department is the greatest police force in the world and they showed us why yesterday. it's this body's -- body's only fwation to pursue policies that help prevent and recover from terrorist attacks. it's a responsibility i'm privileged to share as chairman

of the house subcommittee on emergency preparedness, response, and communications this ealleged perpetrator came to our country illegally. excuse me. legally. using the diversity immigrant visa program. mr. donovan: as a matter of security and common sense, an immigration system that selects winners like a game of bingo should end. i ask congress to also consider the bipartisan stop act to help local jurisdictions install protective objects in areas with high pedestrian traffic. the stop act will protect americans and make them safer. with prayers for the injure and the families of the lost, i yield the the remainder of my timeful the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2017, the gentleman from michigan, mr. mitchell, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the

majority leader. mr. mitchell: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the topic of this special order. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mitchell: today is the action deadline for many colleges in the united states. thousands of student are submitted applications, anxiously hoping for entry into a college, community college or post-secondary school. students try to determine which schools are right for them it's clear they're missing key information, information we all western we had for our chin how much likely are they to graduate? how likely are they to earn a degree or certificate? how likely are they to find a job in how much money will they earn if they find a job? i know this information would be helpful. that's why i introduced the college transparency act. it would make meaning out of the data we gather at the federal level to enable students and parents to make informed

decisions. i have over 35 years in work force development and post-secondary education. i understand the difficulties that people have in making informed decisions about what's best for their future career. i also understand the reporting expectations for career colleges and universities. i understand which institutions have the information available and how they provide it. i also understand the burdens that are -- that occur in providing that information. despite the incredible investment involved and the risk in pursuing a post-secondary education, we and students are left with too little information to answer the most basic questions. what can students expect to pay out of pocket? can you imagine that really they cannot determine how much it will cost them to complete a post-secondary program. how do is students fare in the labor market after leaving college? how likely are they to complete and enter the labor market? how do students fare on metrics of success we all consider important, like earn, loan

repayment? a prospective student opportunity have information about which institutions provide and adequate return on their investment and their parents' investment. it's difficult for me to wrap my head around the idea that americans have so little information about potential may hi what may be the largest investment they make in their lives. i'm the father of six children. we're investing in putting six children through college or post-secondary program. think about how much money go into that. yet we operate in a vacuum on information. when you shop online you're able to compare products. you're able to compare costs. you're able to compare features. the value to consumer. at this point in time, try to do that about programs at a college, university, or career school. try to compare one university's nursing program to another or the architecture program or history program to the nursing program at a college. try to find that information. you won't find it online.

try to call the university. good lucken that it's not that they don't pry trie to provide it. they provide reams of data. they also talk about the reality is the current system doesn't gather that data in a manner that's useful to consumers. the people that ultimately pay the bill. the college transparency act would enable students to answer crucial questions such as how likely they are to enter the work force successfully, whether to transfer from a community college to a four-year college and graduate. students past and present are owners. they hold $1.4 trillion of outstanding federal debt and the clock is ticking. it's time for students, families and guidance counselors involved in the college decision making process to assist students and have access to information that will will make huge investment make sense. orse we leave students to make a decision are the colors on the band uniform are cool.

or they have a good football team. or it seems like they have a nice social life. but ultimately what we're making is an investment in the future of our children and the future of this country. they have massive money in it and we all do as taxpayers as well. we have a huge investment in the preparation of young people for the work force. it's time to streamline and update our higher education information system so families and students can make better decisions on their path to long-term success. it's time to utilize and make meaning out of the data we currently collect to assist in making a choice. questions are asked, why did i submit the college transparency act? i spent 35 years operating a private career school group and working in work force development. i worked at chrysler corporation. moved to another company and ultimately retired out of that field. the point is, i have worked in the feel for 35 years. i understand the data that's reported. i understand the challenges that people have in trying to sort

out what is the best career path for them. how likely are they to succeed in that career path? what's it going to cost to go to school? this information all exists and we'll talk about that tonight but it isn't made available in some coherent manner to students and we need to fix that. we also can't tell students how long on average it takes them to complete their program. it used to be a day where they called them four-year colleges. the reality is four-year colleges are now a dream and five years is the norm and six years is not uncommon. yet we don't talk about the cost it takes to do that. and again we don't talk about it.likelihood of completing we have to fix that. and my -- in my 35 years of dealing with the system, the system is outdated, it's burdensome, it's unhelpful, it

conflicts. it led me to start working on the college transparency act as soon as i came to congress. it was the first bill that i drafted and submitted in the congress. it is the one i spent the most time on. why? because we have a huge investment in postsecondary education and even more importantly we have a huge investment preparing a labor force. i have not gone to an employer since i was sworn into office that has not said to me, we can't find people with the skills to go to work. yet we have people that have graduated from college that can't find jobs that relate to their degree. we have people that will go to college for an extended period of time or a postsecondary program, that don't complete, but they meander their way through. they get lost. they don't have the information to make an informed decision and then somehow, sometimes frankly we blame the consumer. it is our fault. it is our fault here, it is our fault of the federal government, we're making a huge investment

and we expect everybody else to cure the problem. better information on outcomes and student success will certainly assist in closing the schools gap that we talk about nearly every day here in congress and certainly every day in the education work force committee when we meet. senator hatch, senators hatch, warren, cassidy and whitehouse share my concern, and on the senate side, they've introduced a similar bill, almost identical, to address this critical issue. i believe on this issue we can get bipartisan support to move forward with an approach to inform the public, the consumers about the decision they will make with their money and, to be honest with you, our investment in their future. the current system is massively broken. and let me put up a chart that will show that -- it is up. magic here. on the current system. this is the current reporting system for higher education in the united states today. if you can possibly read it from there, and we'll get it submitted for the record, these are all the groups that have gathered data, all the places it

go all the information that's exchanged about students going to postsecondary education in the united states. i ask you, mr. speaker, can you make any sense of that? i worked 35 years in that field. i will tell you that a student enrollment for one system doesn't match the definition of enrollment in another system. doesn't match the definition in the state system. yet we all report that information. graduate information is all different depending on the system. none of the definitions match. now, if we can't get definitions to match internally in a system between state accrediting agencies and the federal government, how is it we expect students, parents to understand whether they're likely to complete the program? and oh, by the way, notice the information adequately reports student outcomes in terms of employment and doesn't provide any information on what they're likely to earn. and guess what. earnings matters in terms of the ability to pay their student loans back. news flash tomb. it helps if they know what they're going to make.

a 2015 study completed by boston consultant group indicated 11.1 billion dollars is spent by institutions to comply with regulations specific to college universities. we don't need more regulations. good god, help us. we have plenty. we have plenty of reporting. one of the most significant findings of this study was the small and medium colleges are disproportionately impacted by those federal regulations. with compliance eating up a much larger share of expenditures than their wealthier institutions. while we say we need more options for continuing for postsecondary education, for current technical education and postsecondary level, we're killing those institutions with rules, regulations and reporting that give us that -- it isn't useful to the public that has to make a decision. imagine that. we have an opportunity to fix that with the higher education act. we have the opportunity to fix -- this proposal. the college transparency act. e have that opportunity now.

there are three main goals of he bill. first and most importantly, the goal is to provide accurate and complete information that's searchable for students and can be customized. think about it. how many people have shopped for an automobile, they have on the website compare whatever vehicle to other similar vehicles. sold by other manufacturers. you can compare them dealer to dealer. you can get an idea of what features are there. shop for whatever you want. and then tell me if you can find that about any educational program offered by postsecondary institutions. this addresses that issue. while reducing reporting burdens on institutions. i think most of our party believes that market competition works best when consumers can finally find out information and make rational decisions. they can compare complete

information. they can compare the offerings and the costs and the outcomes. with that competition we can in fact address one of the other concerns we have, which is what is the cost of higher education? people can compare it not just on what you pay for tying -- tuition, room and board, but the return of investment. what do they get for their time and money in a postsecondary education program? more importantly, choices will be made by consumers and not the federal government. we've seen how that works in so many ways. and the federal government should not be making choices about the future of americans. if we arm consumers with information, we can remove the federal government from the business of determining quality in education and let consumers and accrediting agencies address that. the bill also replaces a number of reporting requirements that the federal government has. most notably what's called the iped survey. did them for years. routinely reget questions that doesn't match their definitions. because their definitions made no sense for many institutions.

and thirdly the bill aims to provide transparency to its students by requiring they be posted in a searchable database and the costs will be identified there. let me go through real quickly, the chart. the information that would be available, that's not currently available on a searchable basis. you can get enrollment patterns, you can get progress to complete. you can get completion rates. do you graduate from a program? imagine that. you can find that out and it's the same definition, whether the university of michigan or michigan state, where i attended. wouldn't that be a great idea? you can find out about their postcollege earnings. it's really helpful. most people go to college to find a job or postsecondary school to find a job, earn some money and support their family. can they do that? what's likely to be the outcome? the cost of the program. i mentioned that a couple of times. it's not just tuition and room and board. the reality is if during the program your costs are significantly different.

my 18-year-old, almost 19-year-old step-daughter attends an art school. beyond tuition, room and board, there's huge costs for art supplies. now, we knew. that i had experience education. there's a lot of people that start these programs and don't understand there are other costs. this process requires reporting of that from the colleges. also information about financial aid that's available for those institutions. so they can compare program to program, institution to institution, and make a decision what's best for them and their family. that's what we're trying to achieve here. it is achieveable. at this point in time, i'd like to recognize mr. garrett who wishes to speak for a few moments on the bill and its advantages. yield time. mr. garrett: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to take the time to thank my colleague, congressman mitchell, for his leadership in this amazingly important area.

and also to point out the bipartisan nature of this bill, not only, mr. speaker, to you, but to those people who might be watching at home, at a time when it seems that we can't agree on anything, here we have an agreement in the college transpatiencesy -- transparency act, and how to ensure a better investment for the futures of our children. now, there are those who have opposed this bill and i can't really wrap my brain around it, mr. chair. some have suggested this might grow government. but that's absolutely not true. in fact, the data that would be made available in this act is already collected. but the problem is that that data is collected and then it's siloed and accessible only to institutions or government entities and not to the end user. that strikes me as illogical at best and stupid at worst. some would say it burdens

colleges with data collection requirements and yet, again, the data is already being collected. what about personal privacy? does it disclose individuals' private information? if it did i wouldn't be standing here today ex tolling the virtues of this bill which i co-sponsor and which mr. mitchell sponsors, that's supported again across the aisle to include the likes of the distinguished gentleman, mr. polis from colorado. instead of disclosing personal data of individuals, it discloses metadata of groups. so what we would learn, for example, is that individuals who majored in x at college y had an employment rate of z. that their earning potential was a, as opposed to another university, where it might be b. and what more prudent information, mr. speaker, could there be to young people as they seek to choose an area of study and a place to engage in that area of study, than their

likelihood of success based on those who have done the same thing at the same college or university before them? so we've addressed some of the things that this bill doesn't do. but let's speak briefly about what it does do. without any ability to articulately argue, this bill increases transparency. when you step aside from the realm of national security, i can think of no reason that the federal or state or local government should be in the business of collecting data that they don't share with the citizens who put them in office, or the people who fund their endefensers. indeed this isn't national security -- endeavors. indeed this isn't national security, unless uconn template the fact that right now our children attend universities deprived of information that might help them make better choices. so this increases transparency it. creates informed consumers it. allows individuals to decide for themselves what college or

university might offer a program that they're interested in is the best investment of their time and perhaps their or their parents' or or the government's money. and it informs payers to that very end, whether that payer is the student, a family member, the state of which they're a resident. it gives us a return on investment and the fact that his data has been collected lo these many years and it took the leadership of mr. mitchell and good folks like jarod polis working across the aisle to get us to this point is lamentable. but we have the opportunity in the college transparency act to correct these wrongs. not to reburden our universities with more data collection requirements. but to take the data that's already being collected and give it to the end users, the students. so it's with that that i again offer a hearty congratulations to congressman mitchell, a

begrudging i wish i'd have thought of that, and an implorement to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle that while we already collect this data, we don't disseminate it to the end users. and i hope that all can find way to join us from both parties in supporting this commonsense measure, the college transparency act. mr. speaker, i would also ask that this letter from the president of the university of virginia in my district be entered into the record and i would note, i would note that institutions from the university of virginia to the entire virginia community college system have endorsed this commonsense piece of legislation. it's a shame we haven't done it sooner. let us not miss the opportunity to pass this now. thank you. i'd yield back. michelle williams i appreciate my colleague -- mr. mitchell: i appreciate my colleague noting both the

bipartisan nature of this legislation both in the house and the united states senate, which as you well know, mr. speaker, is sometimes hard to achieve. we have a listing which i'll put now and i yield time of the institutions and organizations that support the college transparency act. with now over 90 groups that have indicated their support for this legislation. the need for this legislation. i know it's difficult -- difficult to read from there, but in a moment i'll talk more about some of these institutions. at this time i'd like to yield time to my colleague and good friend from ohio, yes, frieze ohio, works for ohio state, i went to michigan state, but i will certainly yield to mr. stivers to talk further about the college transparency act. mr. stivers: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to speak in support of h.r. 2434, the college transparency act. i want to thank my good friend from michigan, congressman mitchell, for his leadership and bipartisan work on this very important bill. you know, this time of year parents and students are beginning to make important decisions about higher education

for the next school year. unfortunately there's little information available about what can be expected from that large investment in a college or a university. this legislation will enable students and families to make informed choices about their education after high school. the college transparency act will provide actionable, customizeable information for students and families as they consider college and universities by accurately reporting on student outcomes such as enrollment, completion, postcollege success, across colleges and majors, most importantly this information will tell students how other perspective students have succeeded at an institution and help point them toward schools best suited for their unique eeds and desired outcomes. the current system is over by burdensome on institutions yet

provides little practical information for students and families due to significant gaps in college data reporting. additionally, the data collected only reports graduation rates for students who begin as full-time students and finish at the same institution, leaving out successes of part-time students and any student who transfers and completes a degree at an institution other than where they started. with more than half of bachelor degree recipients attending more than one school and nearly 2/3 of community college students starting part-time, we have to ensure that these students count. one example of this impact from my alma mater, the ohio state university is a veteran named tammy. tammy returned to school to complete her social work degree after her military service. she completed an associate of arts degree at clumduss state a

community college and transferreded and eventually graduated with a social work degree from the ohio state university. he shad a 3.9 grade point average in the classroom and excelled in her two semester field placement at the university office of military and veteran service. under the -- under this system, tammy's success story would not only count toward ohio state or -- toward ohio state's success but under the new system it will. today the system would not count tammy because she started at one school and transfered to another school. under the legislation that mr. mitchell is working on and that i'm testifying for before today tammy would count again. we need to make people count again. tammy served our country, tammy got out of the military, came

back, went to school part time, then transferred schools, went to school full-time, completed her practical experience. and under the current reporting system, tammy doesn't count. let's fix that. that's what this bill would do. under the updated system, institutions would securely report privacy protected student level data to the national center for educational statistics. nces. nces would be responsible for presenting summary information on a user friendly website for students and families while securely storing student information. this legislation will help countless students and families make better decisions of where to go to higher education. where they should attend. i want to thank congressman mitchell again and congressman polis for introducing this important, bipartisan legislation that will help so many students and families,

students like tammy. so i hope we can roll up our sleeves, work together, and get this bill passed. i urge my colleagues to support this bill. again, i want to thank representative mitchell and representative polis and i yield back the balance of my time. >> thank you. i appreciate your notation of the groups that support this bill. i was surprised about the number of groups who stepped forward to support the college transparency act. some i'd like to stress today is veterans group. mr. mitchell: several have endorsed the bill. it helps veterans determine which programs help their unique needs and provide progress to be successful in the work force, something we owe them as part of their service to our country. as the vice president of student

veterans of america, the post-9/11 g.i. bill is clear, as students succeed at rates higher than traditional students yet determine theegs efforts is a significant effort and not easily accomplished without abundant resources. basic policy on research and not take as much effort as it does today. we currently collect the data people are begging to get to make informed decisions for themselves and frankly in this case to assist veterans in making wise decisions for the g.i. bill so they can be successful. let me talk a little bit more about some of the groups that support the bill and then i'm going to yield to another colleague of mine. college and universities and post-second reinstitutions support this bill which sometimes surprised me given what we're trying to do, make transparent their performance. think about it. they support the bill without

exception. these institutions want more information on student progress, completion outcomes so they can better understand and evaluate how they're serving the students and identify areas of improvement. institutions also know best student level data will decrease the reporting burden to complete the requirements of the federal government, state government and accrediting agencies. associations representing institutions serving the majority of college students supporting -- support lifting the ban on connecting student level data to help build evidence and improve the quality of program. as my colleague, mr. stivers, dicated as well as others, this information is disseminated and developed only at the met a -- metadata level. it's not like we're going to send your social security number out and post it on a facebook page with your employment status. although in your case, mr. speaker, everyone knows well

your employment status. according to the michigan board of university, which serves as the coordinating board for michigan public universities , my home state, the college transparency act of 2017 represents a much-needed modernization of the college reporting system for post-secondary data. the current ban on higher education represents a gross injustice to students and families who require and deserve more accurate data on post-secondary institutions in order to become adequately equipped to make one of the most important decisions in one's life. whether and where to attend college. by providing more accurate nfingts about institutional graduation rate, salary levels and other student outcomes and additional information, the college transparency act will enable the creation of information. i would like to enter that endorsement letter for the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mitchell: for similar reasons the association of public and land grant university

the american association of community college the association of college -- community college trustee the dallas county community college district, state university of new york system, the university of virginia, virginia community college system, ohio state university, louisiana state university, st. clair community college and many others support the bill and we will submit that information for the record as well, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mitchell: at this point i would like to yield time to -- yield time to my colleague from pennsylvania, mr. smucker, to talk further about his sthrines college trands paraphernaliacy act. mr. smucker: thank you to my friend from michigan, mr. mitchell, for hosting this specialed or thorne college transparency act. mr. speaker, i've spoke on the floor a number of times about the house's work to improve education in the country. worked with, been proud to work with my colleagues on both sides

of the aisle in the education and work force committee, to improve career and technical education. i've also spoken about my own experience with higher education as a nontraditional student taking classes at night while i ran a construction company during the day. tonight, i'm happy to be here to lk about ensuring that students, parents, guidance counselors and legislators like us have access to information that can help students make informed decisions about what college to attend. so policymakers have access to research and data that will better inform our work on higher education policy. today, colleges and universitys report data to the u.s. department of education that has been collected by a voluntary survey available only to a limited group of graduates.

the survey is not offered, it's not offered, to any student who is attending college part-time, who is not seeking a degree, any student who is -- who has transferred from another college, or any student who doesn't have federal loans. in today's economy, we're trying to make higher education more available and accessible to nontraditional students. yet we omit a large group of nontraditional students from this data. that's just one of the reasons why we need to pass the college transparency act. this bipartisan legislation seeks to modernize higher education reporting so that students and families can make responsible choices about what college or university to attend. it will help empower students and families to determine how much they immediate to take out in student loans.

and which programs -- which programs at different school prossvide the best paths toward their dream job or career. too many students today are graduating with massive amounts of debt. too many students graduate with majors offering too few career opportunities. at the very least, students need to have this data available to them to make informed decisions. this bill as has been pointed out by mr. mitchell is endorsed by more than 80, more than 80 education and business organizations. including advanced c.t.e. and the association for career and technical education. organizations that represent great schools like thaddeus stevens college of technology in my district. this bill has bipartisan support in our committee. in the senate, in the house. and is essential for trabs

forming our higher -- for transforming our higher education system to meet the needs of a 21st century economy. again, i'm happy to rise to speak in support of this act. i'd like to thank my friend from michigan for hosting this special order this evening. i urge my colleagues to consider supporting this important piece f legislation. mr. mitchell: i want to thank my colleague, mr. smucker, for taking time out of his busy schedule to come here tonight and talk about the college transparency act. he made reference to something i want to stress. annually at the federal level we spend $160 billion a year on student aid. and we currently spend it in into a vacuum. into a giant black hole which we hope we get outcomes. in which students hope they get outcomes. they take out lens. certainly parents hope they get outcomes so they don't continue to live at home with us. we all hope we can get success

for our young people and we don't have the information to determine that. let me also stress that beyond educational group the veterans, we also have support from the chamber of commerce, the u.s. chamber of commerce and the business round table have endorsed this bill as being critical to the success of our nation going forward. i want to stress for you and everyone in this chamber, when you get the level of support from such a broad range of people you have to ask yourselves why have we not already moved on this? why is it not already taking place? we need to move on this issue sooner than later. we can't afford not to. let me talk about one other group that supports this bill passionately. students want to know which schools are best fit for their needs. deciding where to spend their time they precious dollars and incur debt is critically important to them. surprisingly enough, folks, students want to do more than go to college, meet new friends and have a party every now and then.

the vast majority, 85% of college freshmen, rate going to -- getting a better job as very important in their decision to go to college. yet the data they need as we talked about we petedly tonight to discern which programs and institutions will best address that objective is lacking. the ability to provide that information is at our hands. we have the technology. we have the data. we just don't provide it in a usable format. groups that support this bill include the big ten student association. campaign for college opportunity. young invincibles. institute for college action and success. the united negro college fund, achieving the dream, student affairs administrators, institute for higher education policy, the national association for college admission counseling, support the college transparency act. i would ask, how many more groups d we need to gather who

say we need to do this before we decide we need to act here in congress? in the time i have left, i want to address some myths and if my colleague, mr. smucker, who is still here, wants to weigh in, i invite him to join any point in time he wants to weigh in. we've heard a number of myths put forward about the terrible things the college transparency act may arise. while the bill requires institutions collect and report tons of new information, can we bring that chart up of what we already collect? let's look at that gem of what we collect currently. we're doing this now. institutions are doing this now. so tell me how we're going to collect tons more. in fact, every student that attends a postsecondary education institution in the united states has information reported on them now, whether they take student financial aid or not. ecause of 1098-t is filed with

the i.r.s. so if they claim credit for going to school, tuition tax credit, they can claim that. there is no information that's not currently with one agency or another. the astonishing thing is the discussion of somehow it's a secret whether someone is attending a postsecondary education. it's astonishing. college and universities also, because of this reporting, hold the student level data. they report much of it to the department of education, to ncas, to state department education, to accrediting agencies, and a variety of formats. the number of formats, the array of those would totally amaze you. if you'd like, i can get those reports for you. you can spend the afternoon looking through the joys of reporting on educational activity in a postsecondary institution and none of it makes any sense to anybody that isn't actually in the system and i'll admit there are days it doesn't make any sense to me either. colleges and universities also

don't know if their graduates actually get a job, unless they have the student come back happily and say they went to work and how much they're making. they don't get that information. they could assist the stwuent . at information if they tried they don't try. that information exists. why? because the i.r.s. has a 108-t for everyone who goes to college or postsecondary ed institution. they can report that, as was noted earlier, through metadata, to the department of education for developmental reports without reporting any individual student's information. let me talk briefly about

another myth that exists. that somehow tracking student data will lead to a federal rating system. fwral rating system for educational programs of institutions. well, first, the department of education has tried a number of rating systems over there. all with mixed success at best and i'm trying to be polite. but they failed miserably in doing so. they tried to rate institutions bested on default rates and those are being apeeled by many as being inaccurate. they tried to rate institutions on something called gainful employment. but gainful employment for career schools only, because no one goes to university for gainful employment. i assure you, my guess is the speak zr as well, you went to university hoping for gainful employment. i doubt there's anyone in the room that didn't go to a college university in hopes of gainful employment. the reality is the department of education has tried to create

these federal rating systems and failed miserably. so we did something unique. the college transparency act explicitly prohibits the creation of a single database by the department of education and explicitly prohibits using that database for a federal rating system. i give up. i don't want the department of education telling us what a good education system is, because look how well they've done so far. we'll let consumers decide. we'll give them information so they can decide. they can make a wise decision rather than thinking that big brother can make that decision for them. and if the government were doing so well with it, why is it that every member in this room has heard from their employers the terrible shortage we have of people in career and technical education, of workers? if they were doing such a great job of ratings and informing people what their opportunities were, why are we currently struggling with the work force we are? it's a disaster. let's stop thinking we can fix it. and let's let consumers have the financial they need to fix it. the bill enables the ncas to aggregate student information.

from relevant agencies with the responsibility they had to protect that data which they've done for years. so now they're doing not create some massive federal database in which everybody's name, social security numbers are accessible, so we can determine whether or not you are a successful student. doesn't do that. not even close to that. never has. it provides information by program institution of what your ikelihood of success is. last but not least, i talked a ittle bit about it, is keeping personal information private. the fears are about privacy. and that somehow we can't achieve that under the college transparency act. college transparency act requires the data collection to be led by the national center for educational statistics. i apologize. i've been using the abreeskation

because it's been burned into my memory. it's a statistical agency with strong prote cole cols for secure dag at that and protecting student privesifment -- privacy. they consult with private sector, pretty good folks, about how to continue to work on student privacy in that data. it's already required by law to develop an enforce standards to protect individual data. as added protection, the act requires college transparency act requires the institute for the latest security data centers. we require that they implement those on an ongoing basis and they maintain those. i have to tell you, mr. speaker, it's not commonplace in the federal government at this point. we're going a step beyond what happens. every day in many agencies. further, your personal information, mr. smuckers, or anybody else, will never be available to the department of education or to the public. your employment stat us will never be available. what will be available is

whether all of us that took a program at michigan state university, whether or not you graduated, got a job and whether uruguayanfully employed and making money -- you're gainfully employed and making money. only aggregate information is available on the programs and institutions we're talking about here. the data developed by the treasury department on income and employment, once it's transmitted to nces, it is literally bloub up. the file no longer exists. you can't hack what isn't there. so i'd ask at this point in time, rather to ex toll the virtual uasi of the college transparency act -- virtues of the college transparency act, i'd ask all members to look at the act. we have a number of co-sponsors at this time. i'd ask them to look at the act, look at what it's achieving. if they have questions, let's hear those questions and let's make an effort to move this forward. we're already well into the decision making process for

young people to go to a postsecondary education program next year. it's too late for them to get this information. but you know what, we can't get it the following year. and the question i would ask is how long are we going to wait while we're spending $160 billion of direct student aid alone, hoping to get an outcome when we can do better and the ability to do that is at our fingertips. with that i yield back the balance of my time and i thank you for your patience. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2017, the gentleman from illinois, mr. lipinski, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. lipinski: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the topic of this special order. the speaker pro tempore: without

objection. mr. lipinski: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today as a member of the climate solutions caucus, to speak on the issue of climate change. the caucus is a bipartisan group of members committed to implementing economically viable options to reduce climate risk. the caucus has a noah's, a membership rule. members can only join -- noah's arc membership rule. members can only join in pairs. the caucus is helping to break the partisan gridlock on this issue. and show that promoting climate solutions can be truly bipartisan. the formation and rapid growth of the climate solutions caucus represents a recognition of both the challenges and opportunities and has demonstrated that there is bipartisan will to take action. in recognition of the fact that 60 members of congress have come

together to fight climate change in a bipartisan fashion, i organized this time for my colleagues to join me on the floor, to let the american people know what we as their elected leaders are doing to address climate change. we know from scientific evidence that our climate is changing. the global average temperature has increased by about 1.4 degrees fahrenheit over the last 100 years. sea levels are rising. the ocean is becoming more acidic. precipitation patterns are changing. and heat waves are becoming more frequent and longer in duration. each of these changes produces a cascade of effects that impact our lives and livelihoods. including flooding, changes in crop yields, power shortages, declines in fisheries, and increases in cardiovascular disease. recent events in our own country

such as devastating hurricanes in the southeast and wildfires in the west have brought this issue to the forefront of everyone's minds. climate change can't be directly blamed for all these problems. but the evidence strongly suggests that it contributes to each of them. and these are things we can do -- there are things we can do to limit its effects. climate change also has a significant impact on public health. a groundbreaking study published just this week in a medical journal unequivocally showed that climate change is a serious public health threat. the study involved 24 institutions from around the world, it includes staggering statistics such as the fact that air pollution caused 1.9 million premature deaths in asia in 2015 , and that the range of common

disease transmitting mosquitoes increased 9.5% since 1950. we know that high temperatures exacerbate health problems and that burning fossil fuels creates pollution that causes cardiovascular disease. the national academies estimate that air pollution causes around $120 billion per year in health-related damages. including health care costs, missed days of work and school, and premature death. we also know that changing climate has altered the range and in some cases accelerated the spread of vector-borne dses like zika and west nile virus. responsibly transitioning to a clean energy economy will not only reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change, it will also reduce air pollution and help all americans to breathe easier. what i want to talk about for a

few minutes before i turn to some of my colleagues is a very common misperception about the relationship between implementing climate solutions and growing jobs. some people think that this is a zero-sum game. that is, they think if you have more of one, you get less of the other. but that is simply not true. implementing climate solutions can grow jobs. especially new, high-paying jobs. u.s. needs to take advantage of these economic opportunities. regardless of what we do here in the u.s., the rest of the world has committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions in reaching the targets laid out in the paris agreement, as have many cities, states and companies here at home. to achieve that goal, significant technological development and innovation will be needed. as well as infrastructure,

markets and distribution channels to get that technology to the people in places that need it. the national economies that produce this clean energy technology will benefit greatly. the u.s. still leads the world in technology innovation. countries around the world try to recreate the innovation ethos that exist in silicon valley and in other places across our nation. the united states also has the workers that are needed to build these innovations. so we have what it takes and if we seize the opportunity to invest in clean and climate-resilient technologies, then our economy and the american people will benefit, as the world adapts to climate change and america grows good-paying jobs all across our nation. if we let this opportunity pass us by, then profits and jobs will instead flow to foreign

countries that develop the technologies the world needs. and american cities and states will be forced to buy foreign products, as they upgrade to climate-resilient nfrastructure. i will be introducing a bill soon. this bill will establish five or more price challenges to harness private sectorhe to solve big problems. and there are wide arranging organizations including the x-drive to jump the industry. this industry is now flourishing. i was in california and saw their impressive facility.

u.s. is relying on space-x to ing supplies up to the space station. this commercial space transportation industry began with those who tried to reach this challenge. the federal trade commission uses this challenge to have the row bow olympicing service, something we can appreciate. hat's why we are going in this direction. arbon reruse, energy storage and resiliencey. using authority from america competes act, the working groups from universities, nonprofits to

help plan the challenges and even to contribute the enterprises. but to is not to award bring the innovations and help society envision the future. this bill will see what we will look like and i urge my colleagues to support it. now with that, i wan to hear from the climate leaders who have joined me here and i want to yield to my republican colleague from pennsylvania, mr. fitzpatrick. mr. fitzpatrick: i want to thank my colleague for his leadership on this issue. serving as good stewards of our environment is something that each and every one of us is called to do. it is critical to preserve

public health. climate change is real and umans are a contributing factor. as an eagle scout and who grew up in bucks county, pennsylvania. we have it all in bucks county, preserve farmland, expansive parks and rivers and with these tural treasures we need to protect our natural resources. climate chaping and the irresponsible management of our resource is put a strain on our communities. clean air and water are essential to the well-being. mr. speaker, protecting our us.on's open spaces units

i join house resolution 195 to enclourge innovation and protect nd serve and be good stewards. representative huffman. and this designates the land of the arctic natural refuge as the come pont of the preservation system to protect from damaging activities. and i have noted and voted to protect the methane rule. the caucus will continue to be the group to how to fover go the gamesmanship and increase innovation with anne towards sustainability. this cannot be bipartisan.

i yield back. >> thank you for your leadership in your first term here in the house. and coming to solutions on climate change. mr. lipinski: now, mr. speaker, i want to yield to a colleague from california, who has been working for a number of years here in the house, a dedicated member when it comes to issues science and climate change, mr. mcnerney. mr. mcnerney: i want to talk about climate. we know that climate is changing. california we had the lives.es that claimed 40

and we see devastating and more powerful than ever before. the effects are there. now the thing we are faced with if there is a go significant amount of people hole deny climate change. something that is in your interest, you will talk into anything that is everything. we continue to use fossil fuel. f you are a company that produces fossil fuels, this is what you want. the cost of denial is clear. we talked about weather and health effects and both in terms of elevated temperatures us causing people to have health roblems and going from the a

kuwaitor and significant infrastructure costs. these are real costs that we are going to pay for the denial? the significant benefits, we have been spending american taxpayer dollars to reduce carbon emissions. i was working at u.s. wind power with some amount of taxpayer llars we developed wind pour technology. tax credits ended. made a lot of money based on that and we paid for that in united states of america. renewable production creates more jobs and fossil fuel production.

we are talking about creating millions of jobs in this country. but renewable energy has the market feature and highs and will be r and they predictable, this is a have good argument. if we reduce fossil fuels and go envirmente.he so i think the benefits are clear. where are we now? there are resources out there that are determined to mud cry the waters and confuse people. i have three publications. publication. one is called "one for a brighter future."

and because fossil fuels are what we need to power the future. another one "the mad, mad, mad world of climatism. ." it is biased and seems to be paid for by oil interest and another one is the "national geographic" and covers the war on science. so i think we have a pretty good case to make for moving forward with action on climate change. there will be significant costs if we don't. .enewable energy is more than we see wind and solar being more than cost come positive. so we have the technology and have the means, we have the

desire to do this and yet we a still hung up here in washington in terms of falling through with government support that is needed with the right sort of policies that will encourage to lipinski nd mr. pointed out that there is a ipartisan bipartisan caucus in order join you have to have a member of the other party. i have a member of the republican party join and what we are doing in that cuck cuss is creating legislation that will reduce carbon emissions. goo things have a potential to happen. and i encourage the caucus and i hope it continues to grow. nd i yield back to mr. lipinski. relationship mr. lipinski: thank you for all

the wk you do on this issue and other issues that you do in e house. i'm going to back to the other side of the aisle, and i yield to my col ago, the gtleman from new york. >> thank you, mr. speaker and tharpg you, congressmanly opinions ki to highlight the important work being doney the caucus. changing weather patterns and they threaten every aspect including our agricultural and outdoor sectors. it generates $ 2 billion in onsumer spending while supporting jobs.

while we try to address, we must ploy techniques that support economic growth. i'm working with my colleagues on conservation legislation for the next farm bill that will have programs and outcomes allowing regulators to use tax dollars to achieve real conservation results. these incentive programs support programs like increasing yield and lowering the amount of fertilizers and put whole carbon from the air and sequester in the soil. we can work to reduce emissions through greater efficiency and the transportation sector is one have ere co-2 emissions

risen and one easy fix would be to modernize the air trosk control system on guided routes because direct routes save fuel. when cappeda switched, the national fleet was able to reduce by millions of tons beer year. these changes are great steps forward in combatting climate change. we must the real i will pacts and emphasize the need to develop and create jobs with the goal of protecting our environment. we need to work together to develop smart solutions and protect our communities and infrastructure for future generations. i'm pleased to be a member of the caucus and i look forward to working with my colleagues and i

want to applaud mr. lipinski for organizing this special order tonight so we can address this issue and for folks to understand the work that is being done here to address climate change. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. mr. lipinski: thank you for your work and understanding that which are going to make progress on this through bipartisan action and very happy to join working with you on the caucus to bring that action forward. my next speaker is a woman who i work with on the science committee, who has done fantastic work on that committee when it comes to the issue of climate change and dealing with

this e change, one who -- is the the gentlewoman from from bonamici. ms. bonamici: and i want to ank the finders, congressman deutsche and congressman car bellow. and see this is. . to highlight the importance of taking action on climate change. something that matters so much to my constituents at home in oregon, but also to the country and to the planet. this is an important issue that really is a moral imperative. this is about preserving our natural resources, for our children, our grandchildren, and for generations to come.

and addressing climate change is also vital to our nation's economy. we've had some discussion about that this evening. and also to national security. really the health of the planet. now the district i -- i'm honored to represent out in oregons breath takingly blufle been -- breathtaking beautiful. the northern boundary of the district and the rugged pacific ocean is on the western boundary. it has a thriving outdoor recreation economy. and as my colleague from new york mentioned, that's an important sector that cares a lot about the changing climate. i also have in my district the heart of oregon wine country. people in my district fish, they fish in our rivers, our lakes and our ocean. they hike in our forests. they ski in our back country and mountains and we rely on those natural resources in our backyard to support a significant part of our economy. but we're very vulnerable to the effects of climate change.

my constituents are already experiencing challenges, our wine and agriculture industries are concerned about drought as global temperatures continue to rise. coastal communities are worried about the vitality of the commercial fishing and shell fish industries, as high levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere change ocean chemistry. and i was really thrilled that we had an oregonian from oregon state university come to the climate solutions caucus and talk about adapting to ocean acidification. our region has faced higher spring and summer temperatures and earlier snow melt and as a result, a snowboard shop in my district is now selling more skateboards and fewer snowboards. climate change is not a partisan issue. nationwide fishers, farmers, small business owners, our service men and women are changing the way they do their jobs because of climate change. and regardless of their political affiliation. the economic health and environmental consequences of climate change are well known.

and our understanding about how to address climate change continues to improve. people in the united states and around the world are facing threats from rising sea levels, from ocean acidification, from more frequent and severe weather events, from record droughts and flooding and rising global temperatures. we can no longer sit back and debate whether we should take action. the time is now. it's critical that we support scientific research about the climate, and that we build on rather than break down decades worth of progress on this issue. one important area of research is the connection between extreme weather events and climate change. and although it's not possible to say that climate change causes one particular extreme weather event, it's critical that we know more about climate change and how it increases the frequency and the severity of these events. learning more about this correlation can help families,

communities and businesses make informed choice and adopt a climate strategy. this year has been a poignant example after example, with so many devastating extreme weather events. we need to do everything we can to make sure our communities are prepared to keep families safe. since the mid 1980's we've had wildfires in the western united states, but they've been increasing -- we've had them for a long time, but since the mid 1980's they've bin creasing in frequency and duration, threatening live, threatening public health and property. it's been unusually hot and very dry in the northwest. fires and severe smoke create dangerous conditions for all populations. in portland, oregon, on labor day, the sky was gray, full of smoke, from wildfires. this is especially problematic for pregnant women, for seniors, for children, for anyone with chronic health conditions. like asthma. residents and communities miles away from the wildfires saw ash

falling on their homes, their cars and throughout their neighborhoods. this year's hurricanes have devastated communities. of course across texas, across the southeast. and in the u.s. islands. about 70% of our fellow citizens in puerto rico are still without power. 70%. these storms are increasing in frequency and severity and lives are being lost every year. colleagues, it's so important that we take action and that's why i'm so pleased to be here today, to help highlight the importance of this issue. and if representatively -- as representative lipinski noted and others have, we can take action to address climate change and grow the economy. it's not an excuse to say this will be bad for the economy, because we can grow those renewable energy industries. there's so much potential in wind power, wave energy, solar energy. those are good, high-paying family-wage jobs. we can grow those economies and

address climate change at the same time. mr. speaker, addressing climate change is going to save lives, it's going to save property. i am so pleased to be part of this bipartisan group that is working together in equal number of democrats and republicans to call attention to this important issue. and i will continue to work with the caucus to emphasize the importance of congressional action. i thank my colleagues on the bipartisan climates caucus for their dedication to this effort. i know it's quite a relief to my constituents back home in oregon to know that there are bipartisan members who are committed to addressing this critical issue. again, i thank my colleagues for their dedication to this effort. i look forward to the progress that we will make together on behalf of our constituents, our communities, our country, and our planet. thank you, mr. lipinski. i yield back the balance of my time. mr. lipinski: thank you very much, ms. bonamici.

mr. speaker, at this time i'm going to recognize my colleague from nebraska, mr. bacon, who wanted to join us, but is unable to speak at this time. and to note that his remarks will be submitted for the record. our colleague from nebraska, mr. bacon. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. lipinski: next i want to yield to the gentleman who really deserves a tremendous amount of credit for all of us being here tonight. he is the co-chair of the climate solutions caucus, the gentleman from florida, mr. eutch. mr. deutch: i thank my friend, mr. lipinski. thank you for yielding. thank you for your thoughtful and passionate leadership on combating climate change and thanks to the rong bipartisan cross sevks members who have come to the floor tonight -- cross-section of members who have come to the floor tonight to talk about the importance of tackling climate change.

i rise today to call on my colleagues, all of them, to join bipartisan climate solutions caucus. i started this caucus with my fellow floridian, conman curbelo, to start a new dialogue around climate in congress. because we're already facing difficult challenges. we can't ignore it. we can't bury it in political fights. we need to have an open discussion not only for our, but for the impact of -- our future, but for the impact of climate thing that we're facing today. it's no quinsdeps that this project started with two members from south florida. a 2015 study projected that some south florida cities could be underwater within this century. the study's author said some cities appear already to be lost. climate change is already here for floridians. the effects have hit florida first. scientists have warmed of growing average temperatures and

a changing climate for cades. dr. andrew clark of the british antarctic survey has spent 40 years at the bottom of the planet watching it disappear. dr. clark said, you can see the entire environment changing in front of your eyes. we now have climate change right before our eyes in south florida. we see the rate of sea level rise outpace the global rate 10-fold. we see the high water mark jump one inch every year. we see the tides this week, just this week, we see the tides flooding our neighborhoods. the limestone that serves as the foundation of our state is porous. lt water pushes up through the limestone from who the -- below the surface. lower bridge heights will block boats from reaching open waters. with a 165 miles of canals, fort lauderdale fac significant threats of rising seas. and who here, who in south florida hasn't driven around

their neighborhood and noticed more puddles, more water accumulating on the sidewalks and streets? and while many americans might be able to ignore climate change , the science -- ignore the science, but based on their own personal expeience and your own personal experience at home, we can't. looking out our windows we see what's already there. by the year 2100, almost 300 u.s. did hes will lose at least half of -- cities will lose at least half of their homes and 36 american cities cld be completely destroyed. one in eight florida homes could be underwater. those florida homes represent half of the total expected loss in housing value caused by climate change over the next 84 years. these aren't risks of a distant future. these are the burdens we are placing on our children and on our grandchildren. in response, and through the work of te south florida climate compact, miami beach has

initiated a sea level rise plan to lift roads, build up sea walls and install pumps to clear water in the streets. fort laiderdale is fixing roads and drai and sending vacuum trucks into the streets to prevent salt water damage, upgradinguilding codes and flood elevation requirements, and requiring higher sea walls. in forida, you can't put climate change out of sig o out of mind. but it not just hitting florida. and it's not just the sea level rise or increasing temperatures. national climate aelse isment has documented regional climate impacts hitting every area of the united states. in the northeast, the midwest, dramatic inceases in heavy precipitation eventsverwhelm drains an levees, causing flooding and accelerating erosion. inhe great plains d southwest, drought and wildfires strain demands for scarce water resources. in alaa, receding sea ice and melting gracers areamaging infrastructure. on the coast, increas in cabon dioxide and warmingeas lead to corral bleaching and ocean acidification that is

taking its toll on fisheries and the ecostfment the -- ecosystem. the diverse and interconnected impacts we already see throhout our country explain why we already have 60 members who belong to this new dialogue. the climate solutions caucus. 30 democrats and 30 republicans. committ to changing the conversation and pushing solutions that will create more resilient communities. we're committed tonding the impact of clime change -- committed to understanding the impact of climate change, the impact on our national security, to invest in clean, innovative energy production, protecting our public health, and overcoming the political obstacles that hold up public policy solutions. it's time for congress to come together and admit the challenges that our constituents are already facing a home. it's time to build consensus through the bipartisan climate solutions caucus, we have brought tother members from regions in every part of the country who are experncing their own climate change challenges.

i invite every member of the house of representatives to join us lift the voices of your constituents, your farmers, your city officials, your developers, doctors, scientists, and most important liquor t families that you represent. -- most importantly, th families that you represent. if you're watching at home, call your member of coress and ue them to join the clite solutions caucus and help us start the difficult work of building uly bipartisan consensus that will help us tale climate change together and help us create resilient american communities of the future. i want to thanky friend, mr. lipinski, again for organizing tonight's discussio and i wi yield ck the balance of my time. mr. lipinski: tnk you so much, mr. deutch, for your leadership of the climate solutions caucus. mr. speaker, i inquire how much ime we have remaining. the speaker proempore: the gentleman has 25 nutes remaining. mr. lipinski: thank you, mr speaker. with at i want to next yield

to my colleague, the gentleman from new york, mr. suozzi. mr. souzzi: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to applaud my colleague, mr. lipinski, for pulling his effort together this evening. climate change is real and i applaud my colleagues for workingogether in a bipartis effort ttry and find common ground and to seek to work together to pass legislation to address this very real threat. i believe the greatest effort we ha re iso include efforts to move our nations toward a greiner economys part of a comprehensive infrastructure ill. the earth is part of the divine creation and we he an obligation to preserve and protect r precious second, moving toward the green economy that retrofits homes and buildings and installs solar and wind farms will create good jobs at good wages that simply cannot be exported. and third, the main topic i wish to address this evening is moving towards a green economy, reducing our dependency on

foreign oil and addressing climate change is essential to our national security. americans rarely talk about it and sometimes forget, but we supported saddam hussein against the russians in afghanistan -- osama bin laden against the russians in afghanistan. we supported saddam hussein in iraq after the iranian revolution. we supported the assads in syria and we still maintain a close relationship with the saudies, despite their support for with a habbyism. why? because our national economic strategy and security has relied for decades on access to foreign oil. flowed freely local the oil throughout the middle east. by moving towards a green economy and eliminating our dependence, we can see, we never wanted your land or money or oil. all we want is for people to stop killing each other.

and moving independent of foreign oil is the best way to get there. are r and violence exacerbated by the instability of climate change. the instability in syria began ith droughts and destroyed the livelihoods and relied on an economy. when they lost their farms and look for work. and looked to the assad government but were ignored. he they began to revolt. they have killed their people.

this story is being repeated. although the people suffering thousands of miles away, our national security is threatened by these failing states. and the impact of western security. reforms those seeking and unable to respond to the needs of a pop hation. northmyself russia, iran, korea are aided by the effects of climate change and the instability it causes. we must stop this. the growing bipartisan that we must act. the armed services committee in the 2008 acknowledged that

climate change is a direct threat to the newt of the united ates and that quote, the department of defense must be prepared to conduct operations and d threat assessments resources. secretary of defense malt ties and it can be a drive of generated by this fenn no, ma'am on. climate change and rising levels pose serious thress. and along with quote, the requirement for humanitarian ssistance and civilian response. i want to thank my colleagues for the work they have done to try and pri the issue of climate

and find solutions to this real problem. thank you very much. i yield back my time. >> thank you for all your work on this and other issues. yield to the .entleman from california >> thank you, mr. lipinski and thank you, mr. speaker. we are out of time to debate. the effects are already here. recently each year has brought with it record-breaking droughts, hurricanes and natural disasters, my home state experienced our deadliest

wildfire threats. it will cost $22 billion in recovery efforts. that's why i'm proud to work with my colleague in the mr. occur bell oover to introduce the coastal state preparedness act. will help hich states to plan for and implement strategy. mill ons of tax dollars to prepare their strourk. after severe weather events like harvey, we ma and are expecting it.

we need to invest in developing we nuble resources. i urge my colleagues to join me in this effort. mr. speaker. i yield back. thank you for your work and great lead-in for our next speaker and the democratic co-chair, our next speaker is the republican co-chair and thank him for the work he has done inputting this caucus toying and i yield to mr. war dell boo. >> i thank you for owe leading this discussion tonight and great you will to come here for a few minutes and more than

anything thank my colleagues, republicans and democrats who enough pped up and said of the demagog grabbingry, let's focus on what is on the world d how human ks are contributing. the is climate issue, near deniers or the have the men and women who are willing to sit fee table and have a sober conversation that with can really solve this problem. sea-level rice is a reality and happening all over the world. and mr. speaker, you might understand why this is pore. people are lifpk near the sea.

this is a real concern. the ketion and one of the most dynamic areas of the country and i hope we can recover after hurricane irma. but the florida keys and motion of south florida is exposed to his challenge and we know, and we know that human activity is in responsible for this dynamic. and the climate solutions caucus is not about pointing the finger but about coming with solutions. there are three faces. the first phase wag to sit at the table and have a discussion and invite some key witnesses and we have done that. caucus members have a good

relationship. the next phase has been to olympic anti-climate legislation and we have do done that where the caucus said no, we aren't oing to prohibit the defense department with climate change. and this is critical. i represent key west where the men and women work hard to train. and that is a facility that is exposed to this threat. we came together and defeated an amendment that would have prohibited the defense department from assessing these risks. and i think and i'm excited toffer the next phase of the coke cause which is to find legislation that we can all get behind and say these are

reasonable solutions that not only help the environment and help guarantee that we are go to go handoff to our children and grandchildren the same earth, but we are going to provide for growth and new, good paying jobs for young men and women from all this country. that is going to be exciteing. and we are go and promote an aagenda after to bring republicans and democrats gether behind a pro-growth policy that will safe this poll country. leading the world. this isn't an issue. we should rise to this occasion. this is the country that has led he entire world over a host of

challenges. we can do it. but i think we can do it if we do it together. i thank all of my colleagues and my democratic colleagues who have organized this special order. and i think we all would like to invite our colleagues from both sides of the aisle to join the caucus, especially on my side, 30 democrats and 0 republicans. i pride -- only two or three republicans who are willing to discuss this issue. 0 are on the record. let's keep the caucus working and keep the world for the better. mr. lipinski: and for pointing out some of the victories we have had on this house floor and

that is the beginning and there will be plenty more to come as we grow this caucus and do the work that we are here to do. with that, i want to yield to making a ember who is big splash here walking in a bipartisan basis and getting some good things done, the ntleman from california, panetta. mr. panetta: we understand what it takes to get things done and it's the ability to get things together. i'm proud to stand here today with all of my colleagues,

republicans and democrats, as you have heard tonight and the climate solutions caucus that gives democrats and republic caps the opportunity to sit down and discuss ways not only to protect our environment but our homes and nation's security. yes, this caucus consist of people of separate political parties but all of us are united that we must have this dialogue to defend this future. being from the central coast of alifornia, we understand the vulnerability that comes with rising sea levels, something that can impact our economy, our security and daily lives. they understand

and they appreciate that threat. earlier this year, florida was pummeled by hurricane irma. a storm that affected the lives of millions of americans and cleanup efforts. we have seen that at times of crisis, despite the damage and our differences, our government and this congress can put bat ferh back togetherure community. that is our government. and at times where there are storms and damage, we are motivated to come together in government and govern. this year, my district saw this type of governing during the major winter storms. very county in my district saw devastation. one county suffered an extreme

amount of damage. big sur, in particular. the northern route of highway 1 suffered a knockout of a major bridge, a southern route had a major landslide. but i can tell you two weeks ago, i stood on the brand new bridge. and as i was standing there, it was the story of the people of ig sur, very resilient and coming back from these situations but it was the story of government work ng, people getting things done to help people. . i read an editorial where the title of the editorial was, we used to build things. and it was by david brooks and he talked about this big fire called the big burn back in the

early 1900's. that started in washington and oregon and spread throughout the upper west. all the way into montana. and from that devastating fire arose something. that was a u.s. forest service. when i read that article, it reminded me that throughout the history of this nation, we have always built things to help people. we have engineered infrastructure to energize our economy. and we have expanded agencies to embolden and to empower our communities and the people who live there. so now after the storms on the west coast, after the flooding on the midwest, and after the hurricanes on the east coast, it is our turn. it is time for this generation, our generation, to build things. in a smart and resilient fashion. so that future generations are secure and safe in their homes and in their communities. and we need to start by focusing on and building infrastructure that is strong and stable, to

sustain the inevitable intense storms of the future. we know and what has been confirmed by the nonpartisan federal government accountability office, that extreme weather events are already costing u.s. taxpayers billions and billions of dollars each year. according to that g.a.o. report, the federal government spent more than $350 billion over the last decade on losses to private property and disaster assistance programs from natural disasters. that amount doesn't even include the massive price tag on the recovery effort from this year's hurricanes and fires. that are expected to be amongst the costliest in our nation's history. we know that it's going to get worse. as storms are more intense and recovery efforts are going to cost more. so we need to recognize and we need to realize the need for smart rebuilding. after the 2012 hurricane up in new york, hurricane sandy, there was a rebuilding task force that was put together. and it recommended that federal flood protection measures should

entail, that projects receiving federal dollars, they should comply with elevation and flood-proofing measures, to avoid rebuilding them after future storms. the report wanted to ensure that we do not need to pay multiple times to repair flooding damages -- to flooding damaged areas. in 2015 the administration put forward the federal flood risk management standard. that was a standard that set out that federally financed infrastructure projects must be built to withstand future storms and flooding. that standard was meant to ensure that taxpayer dollars are spent wisely and communities are protected. however, in august, this administration decided to roll back the federal flood risk management standard. a decision that was compounded by its poor timing. as it was announced two weeks before the hurricanes that ripped apart houston, florida and puerto rico. so last month congressman cur

bohl and i introduced -- curbelo and i introduced the federal infrastructure flood resiliency act. a bipartisan bill that ensures that federal agencies complete implementation of a federal flood risk management standard. such a standard that will not just benefit our coastal communities, it will help our government and it will help our country. because we know that every dollar that's invested in flood mitigation efforts results in $4 in saved flood recovery costs. this is something that republicans and democrats understand. after hurricane harvey the governor of texas, mr. abbott, he stated, as we go through and build -- in the build-out phase and rebuild texas, part of our focus must be on rebuilding in a way that will prevent a disaster like this from happening again. mr. speaker, by investing in more resilient project designs, our communities will be able to recover quickly and they will be protected against any future flooding.

taking these prudent steps will save taxpayer dollars and prevent future loss of life and property. it is a commonsense step that we can take toward responsible, bipartisan governing. it's this type of governing that needs to happen all the time. when i stood on that bridge and i was there celebrating the reopening of that bridge, the reopening to big sur, i also thought that this was government at its best. where the government came together, it responded, it reacted in record fashion, and it reconstructed a major bridge. so, yes, it made me proud. but it also made me realize that we need to stop just governing by crisis. we need to start governing with leadership. we need to come together to get things done, not just in emergency situations, not just for natural disasters of today, but we need to start governing for tomorrow. the climate solutions caucus understands and believes that we in congress need to lead. we need to do that by coming

together. we do that by talking about the effects of climate change. we do that with flood risk management standard legislation. and we don't necessarily do it for us. we do it for our children. that is leadership and that is why i am proud to be on the climate solutions caucus. thank you, mr. speaker, i yield back. mr. lipinski: thank you very much, mr. panetta. mr. speaker, at this time i just want to thank all my colleagues for their leadership on this issue. the time to take action on climate is now. we can't leave this problem to future generations to solve for us. and as we heard this evening, there's no shortage of good ideas for how to do so. i want to close by reading the mission statement of the climate solution caucus, which reminds us of the many reasons why our bipartisan group has come together to take action. the members of the climate

solutions caucus acknowledge the fact that, if left unaddressed, the consequences of a changing climate have the potential to adversely effect the health of all americans and the strength of our economy. consequently, imposing substantial costs on both state and federal budgets. by seeking to reduce climate risk, we will in turn ensure the protection of our economy, infrastructure and public safety . all while atake energy independence from the world's most volatile regions. therefore it is our goal to take a market-based approach to substantially reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the united states, in order to leave a better planet and a stronger economy for future generations. mr. speaker, this is something that all americans can endorse and support. to a better world and a better country.

so i thank, again, all my colleagueser to joining me here tonight -- colleagues for joining me here tonight and for their work, all the 60 members, 30 democrat, 30 republicans, for their work on the climate solutions caucus. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. under the speaker's announced licy of january 3, 2017, the chair recognizes the gentleman from arizona, mr. biggs, for 30 minutes. mr. biggs: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the topic of this pegssp -- of this special order. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. biggs: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm here this evening, along with my friend and colleague, representative brian fitzpatrick, as we advocate for the passage of the right to try act. this bill, which we introduced together, has dozens of bipartisan co-sponsors, including members here tonight. we are both supportive of senator ron johnson 'efforts to

champion rights to try in the senate. he's been a tirlse advocate of right to try for years and his bill has already passed the senate with unanimous consent. if you're much wag the senate very closely, you know nothing comes out thereof and certainly nothing with unanimous scone -- you the of -- out of there and certainly nothing with unanimous consent. that shows how strong the sentiment is in favor of this bill. terminally termy -- ill patients with no options left the opportunity to try experimental drugs that could save their own lives. yes, there are also provisions in our bill to protect both the patients, as well as the pharmaceutical companies who want to participate. but those provisions are secondary to the primary purpose of this legislation. the primary purpose of the right to try act is to give brave patients across this country some choice over their own destinies when all the other avenues are gone. we want to give hope to these americans. and we should all share that same goal of doing everything we

can for patients fighting to save their lives. this policy has significant bipartisan support. the trump administration strongly supports right to try. and president trump has indicated he would likely sign this bill into law. time is of the essence. time is one thing a terminally ill patient does not have. and the status quo is not the answer. the f.d.a. and other agency officials claim their own expanded access program is working and continues to improve. there may be some truth to that. but the program is simply not enough. and i know that because i've talked to dozens and dozens of patients, family members and advocates who tell me it's not enough. they come to my office, they call me on the phone, they write me impassioned letters. these same advocates have ensured that right to try has become law in 38 states. think about that for a moment. with one more state you could actually ratify a constitutional amendment. and in half of those 38 states, right to try laws passed with unanimous support and in my own home state of arizona, voters

approved that initiative by 80% of the popular vote. at a time when pundits are claiming our politics are broken and republicans and democrats can't come together on anything, here is a cause that americans of all political stripes can unite in. mr. speaker, i am pleased to yield the floor to my colleague, brian fitzpatrick from pennsylvania. mr. fitzpatrick: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to thank my friend and colleague, andy biggs, for him joining all of us in this fight to stand up for terminally ill patients across this country. mr. speaker, each year more americans receive the devastating news of a terminal diagnosis. even with the amazing work done in american medical research and development for too many families access to these potentially life-saving treatments will come too late or not at all. thousands of terminally ill patients, like my constituent, matt, suffer needlessly while waiting final approval for drugs, therapies and other

medical technologies. in april, 2014, at age 30, matt was diagnosed with a.l.s. otherwise known as lou gerhig's disease. a.l.s. attacks nerve cells in the brain and spinal cords, causing those with a.l.s. to lose control of their muscles. although this disease stopped matt's career as a u.s. navy aviator in its tracks, he persisted and actively involved himself in the a.l.s. community as a strong advocate for right to try legislation. while the food and drug administration carries out its three-phased approval process, which can take years and cost billions of dollars, many patients simply want the chance to try treatments that have already been demonstrated to be safe. a bill that was unanimously passed by the senate will offer them a chance to extend their lives. the right to try act, senate bill 204, would ensure that terminally ill patients along with their physicians and pharmaceutical manufacturers can administer investigational treatments where no alternative

exists. in fact, this bipartisan idea is already the law in 37 states. a federal right to try law would prevent the government from blocking access to potentially life-saving medications. it would require patients to first try all other available treatments and be unable to participate in clinical trials. i want to note that these provisions only apply to terminally ill patients. it does not undo f.d.a. approval process, but provides a potential life line for those who cannot wait. moreover, it requires a physician to certify that other options are either exhausted or unavailable. this bill requires that a product meet a demonstrated level of safety by attaining f.d.a. phase-one approval. we've worked with the drug companies to ensure adverse outcomes are not used against the ongoing application for approval. additionally, patients, doctors and manufacturers do not assume

any additional liability under this act. for those patients caught in between the traditional drug approval delays, a clinical trial process for which they do not qualify, and limited time, the right to try simply establishes the freedom for patients and their doctors to try therapies where the benefits far outweigh the risks. it gives them the option of trying to save their life. mr. speaker, whether it's a father like matt courageously battleling a.l.s., or a brave child living with duchenne muscular dystrophy, they deserve the right to try. i yield back the balance of my time. mr. biggs: thank you, mr. fitzpatrick. i appreciate all that you've done and you continue to do in this cause. this important cause. you're a great leader in this and i'm grateful for all of your effort here. at this point, mr. speaker, i'm pleased to yield the floor to my colleague from florida, mr. gaetz. mr. gaetz: i thank the gentleman for yielding, i thank him for his leadership on this issue, on behalf of the terminally ill.

and i would also like to thank senator johnson for marshalling together the resources of the senate, to bring this legislation to a head. i ran for public office because i was tired of the government playing too large a role in the decisions people make in their private lives, in their homes and in their businesses. we live in a world today where the government wants to tell you where have you to send your kids to school, what kind of health care plan you got to buy, what regulations you got to comply with, and how much money they're going take out of your paycheck each and every month. i certainly don't think that the government ought to play a role in deciding how someone deals with treatment at the end of life and that's why i'm a proud co-sponsor of the right to try act, with representative biggs, representative fitzpatrick, and so many others. my frustration lies with any regime, regulatory or otherwise, that would impair a patient's decision to use any medication

to alleviate their symptoms or improve their quality of life in their final days. it is ludicrous to me that in today's world we don't allow terminally ill people in every corner of this great country to be able to use method call cannabis to alleviate their pain and suffering, particularly at the end of life. it's so frustrated to -- frustrating to me that the federal government has lied to this country for a generation about medical cannabis, saying that it has no medical value. i can tell you, mr. speaker, that is absolutely not true. i've met with patients in my district who have received terminal diagnosis, who have been told not to buy green bananas, yet those folks courageously move forward trying to be part of their own treatment, to be part of their own clinical plan moving forward. and too often, doctors whether it's at the v.a. or in private practice aren't able to counsel their patients and give them

advice and comfort that there is a substance in medical cannabis which has proven in some circumstances to have medical value. stage 4 terminal cancer includes symptoms like loss of appetite, which can be helped by cannabis. chronic pain, shortness of breath. chemotherapy indutioned nausea. all those things can be helped by cannabis. those who have stage three of aids have sleeplessness and weight loss that can be helped by medical cannabis and it's shown great promise in the treatment of alzheimer's, crohn's disease, multiple sclerosis and epilepsy when there are refractory seiziers -- seizure, at times 30 or 40 seizures a day. in this great country we'll have people who receive terminal diagnosis each and every day. i say let's get the government out of their way. let's let the decisions that

impact the health care of patients be made by patient, family members an their doctors, not a bunch of politicians and bureaucrats in washington. as people fall ill, it's my position that this right to try act could help them and certainly the inclusion of medical cannabis into this legislation would make it a great deal more useful and a great deal better for those in pain. i thank the gentleman from arizona and i yield back. mr. biggs: i thank the gentleman from florida for his impassioned speech and his position. and his comments regarding the bill and his desire to see it altered. but i do appreciate his support of the bill. i am certainly grateful to have this opportunity to yield time to, mr. speaker, to the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. smucker. mr. smucker: thank you, mr. speaker. i'd like to thank my colleague from arizona, mr. biggs, for hosting tonight's special order. thank you to mr. fitzpatrick as

well for his leadership in this bill. i'm really glad to be part of this effort. you know, we could stand here tonight and talk about the f.d.a.'s process for approving drugs. we could talk about the countless patients across the country that struggle to get accepted into a clinical trial for a drug that could save their life. and i could even stand up here tonight and share with you one of the uplifting stories of -- stories of a patient who received a life-ceying drug because of a state's right to try law. but we have heard this and we know all of this we know the f.d.a.'s approval process takes years. we know there are too few spots in clinical trials for patients in dire need of help. an we know that right to try laws give families hope and can save lives. what i'd like to talk about tonight is the moral imperative

we face on this right to try legislation. america is home to the world's greatest doctors and medical experts. it is home to the world's greatest medical schools and hospitals. we have cured diseases that were once a death sentence. we've directed our national resources to fight epidemics that have saved lives here at home and overseas. we don't give up. what we do here in this chamber, mr. speaker, speaks volumes. what we do here shows the nation and the world where our priorities are. is our priority the bureaucracy of this city that too often misses opportunities simply because of its inability to act? or is our priority the patients and families that we represent? to consult with a doctor and

decide for themselves house they choose to fight against illnesses for which we continue to search for a cure. for me, the choice is clear, mr. speaker. i choose my constituents. i choose life and i urge every single member of this body to do the same. we cannot afford the cost of inaction. thank you. mr. biggs: thank you, mr. smucker. appreciate your comments and your willingness to participate this evening. mr. speaker i'm pleased to yield the floor to my colleague from arizona, mr. gosar. mr. gosar: thank you very much to my friend from arizona. what a great issue. as a conservative, i'm an outspoken defender of one's right to life but being pro-life doesn't mean i'm anti-abortion, it also means i support the right to try because life at all stages is worth fighting for. every year over one million

americans die from terminal illnesses. many of which pass away while waiting for the f.d.a. to aprove a drug that could dramatically change their prognosis, while others die in the hopeless cycle of trying and trying again to accept, to gain acceptance into a medical trial. think about that. for losing millions of americans at the hands of government red tape. now as a health care provider for 25 years, i know firsthand how important innovation is to the medical community. the right to try act, if made into law, will give hope to a child with leukemia whose doctors have exhausted all other treatment options. it opens previously locked doors by a i louing health care providers to try drugs as a last-ditch effort for survival. the experiments it will allow for have the potential to lead to more birthday, more piano recitals and more camping trips. it offers hope for the future and hope for years to come. don't take my word for it.

emily was 5 years old when she s diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia and was among the small percenting an of patients who was not responding to treatment. the family was at the end of the rope. the window for many more birthday, more piano recitals and more camping trips was wearing thin. their only option was to join a clinical trial where emily could be the first pediatric patient to undergo this treatment. you know what? it worked. three years later a ground breaking study was conducted with 63 patients received t-cell therapy for one year and 52 of them became cancer free. and -- an absolutely unheard of statistic with this deadly strain of leukemia. think about that. 52 lives saved. 52 families given another birthday, another piano recital and another camping trip. what a waste it would have been

had they not had the right to try. i yield back. mr. biggs: thank you. mr. speaker, i thank all of my colleagues who have joined us tonight to champion this worthy cause and inquire how much time i have left. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona has 15 minutes remaining. mr. biggs: thank you, mr. speaker. in closing, i want to mention how i came to really be converted to the cause of right to try. i served in the arizona state napericture with laura ka who was serving in the legislature but by 2014 she was no longer serving in the state legislature. she was an advocate. she was in the fight of her life against ovarian cancer and her mission was to see right to try legislation passed into law. in the end her effort this cause

succeeded beyond everyone's wildest expectations when 80 noveget electorate in arizona voted to enact right to try. but unfortunately laura is not with us because she lost her brave battle with cancer last year. yes, last year. but her legacy as a tireless patient advocate lives on. i'll continue to carry on the fight not just for laura but for all those patients across this country who are battling against the odds every day. and i'm joined by those who are here tonight, those who have co-sponsored this bill and many others. many other advocacy groups such as goldwater institute in arizona who continues to fight for this. i fight for bertrand mike, bertrand is a special little boy. the first person to be diagnosed with a rare fatal disorder called ngoi-1 that left him paralyzed. because it was only identified

in 2012 and only a few people with it have been diagnosed with it, there is no cure and no treatment available because the dised orer is so rare, a drug may never be developed to treat it. but scientists have found that bertrand responds to certain investigatal therapies. so his family will have to rely on trying those new investigatal medications as long as they have access to them. that's why we need this right to try legislation. i fight for jordan. 7-year-old jordan wants to grow up to be a firefighter so he can save lives. he has duchenne muscular dystrophy which could leave him paralyzed in five years and shortens his life expectancy to 20 years there ast drug now helping young children like junior dan but it could take another seven years for that drug to be available on the market. his parents cannot afford to wait for the f.d.a. to give that drug its final approval. he could be in a wheelchair by

hen. the investigational drug could add years to his life giving him the chance to save others. we already heard when representative fitzpatrick discussed matt many lena and his needs and his advocacy and we fight for him. we fight for mikayla. at 24 she was diagnosed with a deadly form of kidney cancer that had already migrated into her bones before she even knew she was sick. she went through every known treatment in a matter of months and nothing worked. her high school sweetheart, keith, heard about a drug under development successfully treating people with this same cancer. but mikayla was not allowed to enroll in the clinical trial. mikayla and keith launched a social media campaign to try to get access to the drug but it wasn't enough. the f.d.a. didn't help. mikayla died on april 24, 2014. five months later, september 4,

the f.d.a. gave final approval to the drug that might have saved her. i fight for diego morris. when he was 10 years old , he woke up with a sore leg his mom thought was another sports injury but the pain didn't go away. they knew something was wrong but they never expected osteosarcoma, a rare form of bone cancer. after exhausting all treatments available, his doctors recommended he try a drug that wasn't available in the united states but was being safely used and had been given an award, the gold medal for pharmaceutical research, in england. the morris family waste nod time and made the move abroad to save trie to save diego's life. the treatments worked and he's back home in phoenix and back to playing his favorite sports.

we fight unitedly for the countless other patients who deserve a right to try. we must act without further delay. again, i thank those who have been here to testify tonight and with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. does the gentleman from arizona have a motion? mr. biggs: yes, i move to adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly the house stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow for morning hour debate.

on friday, the chamber plans to work on legislation that extends federal funding for chip, the children's health insurance program that expired at the end of september. you can follow the house live on c-span when they returned thursday at 10:00 a.m. eastern for speeches and at noon for legislative work. which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] president trump talked about the attack in new york city. his remarks from the white house are next. and reaction from new york senator charles schumer and senator lindsey graham said the suspect should be held as an enemy combatant. a defector testifying before would trigger automatic retaliation from north korea. the newunday night,

book on ulysses s. grant. gnashing andng and romantic and handsome. he was a perfect leading man for a musical. different beat. he was plain and laconic. the charisma of ulysses s. grant is he had no charisma. in differentamatic situations. he is not as fascinating but a , no less dates in hamilton. washington,orge george washington had a similar kind of preserve and enigmatic quality -- reserve and in quality to grant.